Be careful you do not get TMJ from it. I'm not joking.
But you seem to still be here. haha

Edit: I never understand this from people who dislike GOG. Why do you hang around GOG forums if you don't like the service? I don't hang around steam forums saying I''m leaving or how much I dislike steam. Richlind I'm more speaking out loud not directly at you.

Why is it you feel the need to be so Black & White?
Why cannot you use Steam and GOG and whoever else provides a Linux version of a game.

GOG don't support Linux, as they state, but they don't totally ignore it either, with many games here having a Linux version. I have over 530 GB of Linux versions at GOG, that's 379 games or demos, and there are many games I don't own at GOG.

Steam are in a far better situation to support Linux games. 5% of customers at Steam, if there are even that many there that are Linux gamers, is a huge amount compared to the same percentage of customers at GOG.

GOG cannot support Linux without cost, and from all I have been able to determine, GOG just struggle to support Windows. They also support MAC, but the MAC customer base is at least double the size of the Linux one.

GOG won't support Linux, until it is financially viable for them.

And any lack of Linux versions of games at GOG is likely down to developers and publishers and not really the fault of GOG.

Honestly, there's absolutely no reason to get any Steam deck, other than the cheapest $400 one. There are some amazing matte screen protectors available for the deck, that are even better than the etched screen. And you can buy a 512Gb ssd for cheap. If I could go back in time I'd definitely order the cheapest one instead of the etched screen one.

The deck is amazingly comfortable no matter the size of your hands, as long as you don't need to reach the bumpers, which are the only buttons that don't fit the layout.
How or why would that even be a possibility?

Frankly, I've been a long time more in the mindset that it isn't that much the game publishers and digital stores (like GOG) that should try to support Linux better, but Linux should try to support Windows gaming as well as it can. Ie. that you can run Windows games in Linux, with WINE etc.

Fortunately that is exactly what seems to be happening, and I am fine with it. I even feel that demanding game publishers to support Linux (on top of Windows) just leads to sloppily made Linux-versions of games which are not kept up to date and are abandoned much earlier than Windows versions, etc. After all, the game developers have to divide their resources between two different OSes then.

If the unthinkable happens and Linux really becomes a mainstream OS for PC gaming, fighting head to head with Windows, then I would expect publishers to be more eager to make separate Linux versions of games.

In the current state, I feel the best we can hope for for the majority of PC games that Linux can run the Windows versions of games as well as it can.

Bad posture can case it when gaming. It pretty common actually

Fortunately that is exactly what lots of Linux developers are doing, hence WINE, Lutris, play.it, PlayOnLinux and whathaveyou. Even Valve's work on getting Steam games to run better on Linux can be seen as part of that, of course.

In a way I prefer that instead of e.g. GOG trying to provide "Linux versions" of their games by bundling the Windows version with WINE, it should be the other way around that it should be easier in Linux to use the GOG Windows version of a game with WINE/Lutris, for example.
Quite often they do. I am playing e.g. the GOG Windows version Planescape: Torment EE in Linux, without any issues at all. And many other GOG games.

I think it was Two Worlds (GOG version) where I got the revelation that I'd rather try to run the Windows versions of (GOG) games in Linux using WINE and/or Lutris, rather than trying to rely on GOG's support on keeping their Linux version working with many Linux versions and distros.

In the end I didn't see much of advantage GOG keeping the "Linux" version of Two Worlds available, it was much more meaningful to me try to get the Windows version to run in Linux, especially as the "Linux version" wasn't really more than the Windows version bundled with WINE, which itself caused some problems in newer Linux due to some broken dependency.

Maybe if GOG used appimages or flatpacks or snaps for their Linux versions, maybe they would work more reliably on different Linux versions/distros.

I am unsure if your main beef with GOG is that Galaxy has no Linux version. I personally don't care as I am not using Galaxy even in Windows, I use only the offline installers. Then again, if GOG had only very few games that reliably run on Linux too, what use would the Linux version of Galaxy be anyway? Just having a the client ported to Linux doesn't magically make GOG games run on Linux (using the said client). It is much more involved than that.

That said, I admit Valve seems to do pretty good work with their own Linux support, at least considering how effortless it is to run e.g. Team Fortress 2 or Portal 2 on Linux. The experience doesn't really differ at all from playing those same games in Windows, click to install and play. But then I feel e.g. Lutris offers almost similar experience with many GOG games, you just tell Lutris to install from the GOG offline installer, and play it.

With Steam that isn't as feasible as Steam games generally rely on being installed and played using the Steam cliient, so support from Valve is pretty much required.

i buy games from gOg, Steam, Epic, Humble, itch.io, Origin, UBIStore and a couple of others. none of these are in conclfict with each other. personally, what I consider imprtant is the games, not where I buy them. Off course as a Linux user, you need games that work on Linux, but if they do - then it does not matter where they are from, does it?

I think it is silly to only use a single store.

I agree with your point, in theory, but the problem is that most of those storefronts (with the exception of Steam) generally don't work on Linux. I want nothing more than to continue using GOG to buy most of my games, but if I end up making the move to Linux, then what's the point of buying my games on a platform that doesn't support my operating system? That's what I'm trying to decide.

I've got 70+ games here that occasionally get updated. Steam forums aren't worth much coming or going. GOG is GOG.

the pint is - theere is nothing stopping you from using both. Sure, it will be primarly Steam as they do have better Linux support, but then - it does not stop you from buying a game on gOg that does come out with a Linux version. Yu do not need to leave gOg to be able to use Steam

I used to buy games on DotEmu, Humble Store and GOG.

DotEmu stopped selling games and Humble Store only redistributes Steam keys now.

Due to their drm-first approach, I tend to stay away from most of the other stores (I'm not interested in feeling like the only way I would ever accept to purchase games is at best unofficially tolerated). I guess that leaves itch.io maybe as an alternative to GOG...

Well, I am a Linux user, and have only ever puchased my games from GoG. I do have access to an old Windows 8.1 computer for when games I buy don't have Linux versions or don't work in W.I.N.E. But I very much doubt having a discussion here will in anyway change GoG's stance on its support (or lack there of) for Linux where games are concerned. If they were to, I would be one of the first to welcome it, as it would make purchasing compatible games for my system so much easier, by reducing the amount of research needed to see if will work with the systems I have. But I am under no illusion that this will ever change...

and that is your choice

Yes, though I think it is a sad statement about the state of the gaming industry and the extend to which vendors have managed to completely trample the ownership rights of their customers.

Only 2 online stores I know of are pro-customers now in gaming.

Anyways, that would be a thread on its own, so I'll stop here.